Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Legal but it Doesn't Make it Right

So there I was having a conversation yesterday and the discussions were on a wide set of subjects. Everything from Samurai Police (I have start reading the Sano Ichiro books by Laura Joh Rowland) to equality and feminism. And yes it was a lady I was speaking to who helps immensely with my health. Obviously not going to cover everything but a couple of things that were said have set me thinking which is always dangerous.

First thing that hit me was that whilst training as a nurse she was informed she was going to be more likely to see sexual assault on men, this by the police. I had never heard this before so came as a surprise especially as the radical feminists I have debated with always heavily play the SEVs cause men to sexually assault women. Obviously knowing how inaccurate the Lilith report is and the truth about Newquay you sort of realise that discussions with organisations like Object and UK Feminista are not actually discussions as that would involve both sides listening.

Now here is the bit that really struck home as we got on to the potential ban on lad mags. I pointed out that the radical feminists are using objectification as their primary argument, to which I was told it is surely the choice of the models. Thinking about it not only is that the most true statement that it is a choice but it also highlights that the only women being objectified are those that have made a choice to be. It is only those people that think that men are constantly objectifying every woman that see and do not think of women other than sex objects. And when you actually think about it that is one of the most stupid concepts ever. I have female members of my family of course I don't objectify them, I have female friends and I don't objectify them so even if I did find a woman attractive either from a magazine or a SEV that doesn't and cannot mean it carries over to every women or anything other than a few minutes.

The discussions really resonate around the freedom of choice and more that not only are radical feminists not speaking for the models they are also not speaking for a lot of women. It comes back to the whole issue about a vocal minority deciding what is right for every woman without having spoken to every woman to get their opinions. It just seems because they have a belief some radicals think every woman should not only believe the same but that actually already do. Women can identify with having feminist tendencies as can most men. I certainly want to see Britain as a meritocracy where everyone is judge on ability and not on who they are friends with or how they fit the requirements based on sex, colour or sexual preferences. We all should succeed or fail based on being the best. And that everyone should be able to choose their career based what they want so long as it is legal.

Of course you do get people pointing out that just because it is legal it doesn't make it right. I would agree especially on capping disability payments is legal but it doesn't make it right. Telling people what they are doing is immoral and wrong is legal but it doesn't make it right. Claiming to speak for all women when you obviously don't is legal but it doesn't make it right.

TonyN (tonyprince@acdcfan.com)

Edit: I was reading back one sentence and realised it made less sense than I normally do which is not a lot as it is. It is only those people that think that men are constantly objectifying every woman that see and do not think of women other than sex objects should read It is only those rad fems that think that men are constantly objectifying every woman that see and do not think of women other than sex objects rather than the truth that men see women as women except for very short instances.

Having thought about it more some people have created whole careers peddling the snake oil that is objectification.

2 comments:

  1. So true Tony. The objectification argument that get's wheeled out nearly every time there's a discussion that involves women taking their clothes off or looking sexy annoys me immensely. It's stretching it a bit to even call it an argument, as it is really just a massive assumption .
    I wrote this the other day on the digital spy forum which sums up my views on the matter:

    "I think it is a disservice to say men have been programmed to see women as' sex objects' Instead i think it would be better to just say heterosexual men have been programmed to be 'attracted to women' as I think most of us can appreciate that an attractive looking woman is also a person too.
    The word objectification is a blanket term used by anti-sex feminists to make this physical attraction into something sinister, when really it is all perfectly natural. It's like they're putting word into men's mouths and telling us how we should think. They see it as some kind of silver bullet/ argument killer to try an justify their disapproval/ jealousy of another woman taking her clothes off and being desired by other men for example."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It really is a case of we have no valid argument so we will claim that any objectification especially if it of someone who is okay with it is wrong for every woman. It is taking personally something that doesn't affect you.

      If they can't make that sinister then the whole house of cards falls apart so they will claim it affects all women constantly. Yet even as a young man I could never be in a constant state of objectifying women. You are right it is just an excuse with nothing behind it other than a desperate attempt to justify an unjustifiable stance.

      Delete